Peter Alping1, Thomas Frisell2, Lenka Novakova3, Protik Islam-Jakobsson4, Jonatan Salzer4, Anna Björck1, Markus Axelsson3, Clas Malmeström3, Katharina Fink1, Jan Lycke3, Anders Svenningsson5,4, Fredrik Piehl1. 1. Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Department of Medicine Solna, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden. 3. Department of Neurology, Institute of Clinical Neuroscience and Physiology, Sahlgrenska Academy at the University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden. 4. Department of Pharmacology and Clinical Neuroscience, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden. 5. Department of Clinical Sciences, Danderyd Hospital, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Many JC virus antibody-positive relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients who are stable on natalizumab switch to other therapies to avoid progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. METHODS: We compared outcomes for all RRMS patients switching from natalizumab due to JC virus antibody positivity at 3 Swedish multiple sclerosis centers with different preferential use of rituximab and fingolimod (Stockholm, n = 156, fingolimod 51%; Gothenburg, n = 64, fingolimod 88%; Umeå, n = 36, fingolimod 19%), yielding a total cohort of N = 256 (fingolimod 55%). RESULTS: Within 1.5 years of cessation of natalizumab, 1.8% (rituximab) and 17.6% (fingolimod) of patients experienced a clinical relapse (hazard ratio for rituximab = 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02-0.43). The hazard ratio (favoring rituximab) for adverse events (5.3% vs 21.1%) and treatment discontinuation (1.8% vs 28.2%) were 0.25 (95% CI = 0.10-0.59) and 0.07 (95% CI = 0.02-0.30), respectively. Furthermore, contrast-enhancing lesions were found in 1.4% (rituximab) versus 24.2% (fingolimod) of magnetic resonance imaging examinations (odds ratio = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.00-0.22). Differences remained when adjusting for possible confounders (age, sex, disability status, time on natalizumab, washout time, follow-up time, and study center). INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest an improved effectiveness and tolerability of rituximab compared with fingolimod in stable RRMS patients who switch from natalizumab due to JC virus antibody positivity. Although residual confounding factors cannot be ruled out, the shared reason for switching from natalizumab and the preferential use of either rituximab or fingolimod in 2 of the centers mitigates these concerns. Ann Neurol 2016;79:950-958.
OBJECTIVE: Many JC virus antibody-positive relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS) patients who are stable on natalizumab switch to other therapies to avoid progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy. METHODS: We compared outcomes for all RRMS patients switching from natalizumab due to JC virus antibody positivity at 3 Swedish multiple sclerosis centers with different preferential use of rituximab and fingolimod (Stockholm, n = 156, fingolimod 51%; Gothenburg, n = 64, fingolimod 88%; Umeå, n = 36, fingolimod 19%), yielding a total cohort of N = 256 (fingolimod 55%). RESULTS: Within 1.5 years of cessation of natalizumab, 1.8% (rituximab) and 17.6% (fingolimod) of patients experienced a clinical relapse (hazard ratio for rituximab = 0.10, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.02-0.43). The hazard ratio (favoring rituximab) for adverse events (5.3% vs 21.1%) and treatment discontinuation (1.8% vs 28.2%) were 0.25 (95% CI = 0.10-0.59) and 0.07 (95% CI = 0.02-0.30), respectively. Furthermore, contrast-enhancing lesions were found in 1.4% (rituximab) versus 24.2% (fingolimod) of magnetic resonance imaging examinations (odds ratio = 0.05, 95% CI = 0.00-0.22). Differences remained when adjusting for possible confounders (age, sex, disability status, time on natalizumab, washout time, follow-up time, and study center). INTERPRETATION: Our findings suggest an improved effectiveness and tolerability of rituximab compared with fingolimod in stable RRMS patients who switch from natalizumab due to JC virus antibody positivity. Although residual confounding factors cannot be ruled out, the shared reason for switching from natalizumab and the preferential use of either rituximab or fingolimod in 2 of the centers mitigates these concerns. Ann Neurol 2016;79:950-958.
Authors: Maria Trojano; Mar Tintore; Xavier Montalban; Jan Hillert; Tomas Kalincik; Pietro Iaffaldano; Tim Spelman; Maria Pia Sormani; Helmut Butzkueven Journal: Nat Rev Neurol Date: 2017-01-13 Impact factor: 42.937
Authors: Susanna Brauner; Ann Eriksson-Dufva; Max Albert Hietala; Thomas Frisell; Rayomand Press; Fredrik Piehl Journal: JAMA Neurol Date: 2020-08-01 Impact factor: 18.302
Authors: F Esposito; L Ferrè; F Clarelli; M A Rocca; G Sferruzza; L Storelli; M Radaelli; F Sangalli; L Moiola; B Colombo; F Martinelli Boneschi; G Comi; M Filippi; V Martinelli Journal: J Neurol Date: 2018-02-12 Impact factor: 4.849